Switched attenuators, what's all the fuss about?

[Bigman80]

Thanks very much for your encouragement, James. I will report my impressions, as soon as the new Khozmo attenuators have been installed and some critical listening has taken place.

By the way, I was under the impression (conviction?) that my Croft 25RSLS was as transparent and realistic as could be. Until I bypassed the Tocos pots and used the Hattor dual mono passive as a volume control. Definitely not the optimal solution in terms of hardware economy, but the sonic improvement was substantial and definitely not marginal. It was supposed to be an experiment to showcase the effect that pots play in the sound quality. Well, I can say it was equal (or even more) to the improvement I got, when I had the 'standard' Micro 25 preamp upgraded to 'R' spec by Glenn. Croft owners may understand what I mean. I would not call that improvement marginal.

Now, if I install Khozmo series attenuators inside the Croft preamp box (and get rid of all binding posts and interconnects I now have in the Hattor+Croft combination), I expect (and hope) that the result will be even better. And I am not even referring to the greater ease-of-use thanks to the remote control. I am focusing entirely on sound quality here.

The caveat is that when a system improves, it makes the distance between good and mediocre/bad recordings even bigger. Recordings that used to be OK in the past, may be unsatisfactory from now on. Hmmm...

What you have to remember is, Jimbo is incredibly happy with the sound he gets from his rig. Lots of people I speak to are in a similar position.

That doesn't mean they are striving for the same thing as you/me/someone else, and that they now have achieved perfection. It is *their* perfection and that's why Jim and others are reluctant to make changes, which is totally understandable.

I've heard James's setup and it was simply superb, so much so, it inspired me to do more with my own system.

BUT, is it Ultimately accurate?

Impossible to say because to Jim, what may be accurate, to me/you/someone, maybe not. I have been in this scenario multiple times and have learned that even my own system, that I love, to someone else may be shit.

You heard what you heard when you swapped out the TOCOS for the Hattor and my money says you're on the right path in getting a couple of Khozmos in there.

There won't be a loss of organics, there will be more. That's what happened with Alan's Firebottle KIN. In fact, it was so good I am still thinking about it.

Trust in what you're doing and you'll be rewarded with a great result.

[Light Dependant Resistor]

Accuracy requires the original recording, capturing the players, venue, acoustic to all be reproduced
so each instrument is heard with the others, as it was recorded. The best recordings assist with this by giving
you photo images of the players and recording venue.

As can be seen by differing opinions of one type over the other, there is far more to attenuation than we first think, if accuracy is the goal needed.

Broadening your horizons to encompass the other types of attenuators other than potentiometers and switched attenuators,
gives much needed perspective.

[pankon]

What you have to remember is, Jimbo is incredibly happy with the sound he gets from his rig. Lots of people I speak to are in a similar position.

Yes, Olie, I understand Jimbo's position. It's perhaps what we all feel about our systems, until we try some kind of upgrade and -when it's successful- we ask ourselves why we had not tried that earlier.
My personal goal is to get the maximum out of a design / device with judicious tweaks. And I am happy to experience that Croft designs have A LOT of hidden potential. The pots and perhaps the input selector definitely have room for improvement, hence my choice of Khozmo attenuators. Perhaps there are other parts in the Croft amps that can be upgraded and achieve better, clearly discernible performance.
By the way, although logic said that I could do well with a well-built, dual mono passive preamp (a.k.a. Hattor) and get rid of the active preamp stage (a.k.a. Croft), my trial showed that the passive stage provide great neutrality and transparency, but the active stage brings "life" back to the music. Perhaps it injects distortion, which is perceived as "life", but after all "perception is reality", isn't it?
So, closing a full circle, the objective is to combine the best traits of the Hattor and the Croft, inside the Croft box. That's my short story so far.

[JohnG]

When I was talking about a systems performance as a comparison to a live performance, I was not referring to whether I thought a system could be capable to produce the comparative sound of a Rock Concert or the like.
I was referring more towards a A cappella, or small group performances from any genre.
If a system were to be identified as having a capability to closely match a live rendition, then it would be a
attractor to know that there is a honesty being produced in the replays.
As stated earlier, this is not a route I would foresee myself going down, I like the stimulus from the effect of a assembly of devices, and as said each to their own on this one.
Does a Footy Match get any better if watched on BBC, ITV, Cable TV or from the Stands.
I am certainly a armchair type, who once in a while likes to see a performer in the flesh.

[Firebottle]

My personal goal is to get the maximum out of a design / device with judicious tweaks.

I think this sums up my approach as well, although I have recently spent on TT upgrades that are larger than 'tweaks'.

Now the AD attenuator has been in for a few days all the usual favourite albums have been played, plus a couple of others.

The improvement has been amazing, I am even hearing a better sound from DAB radio at 128kbps, insane.
(Not much but an improvement given the source).

One of the most notable changes has been to the lower registers, they are palpably more distinct. The effect is to underpin the sound with what you could describe as better foundations to a building.
The bass and midbass is now an integrated part of the sound, not drawing any adverse attention, no bloat but tremendous impact when there should be. Kick drums come over with a solidity and power that wasn't apparent before.

The rest of the spectrum has opened out as well, cymbals tinkle more, individual instruments are placed more distinctly. Multiple voices are now all individual such that you can enjoy the performance more due to hearing everyone's contribution.
The power and rasp of brass instruments has come to the fore, I even heard greater nuances on the Yello Toy album, which has been played a lot.

Another big bonus is that CD reproduction has taken a leap forward, now instead of wishing the CD was a vinyl record, I can enjoy the medium without thinking it needs a big upgrade to compete.
Now that's a very pleasant surprise

In conclusion the best single upgrade I have made................

I have been counting up the upgrades over the last 12 months and they total 7. I'll put these into a new thread.

[User211]

The most amusing PA-come-hifi system at Munich the year I went was playing Pink Floyd 'The Wall' and consisted of a PA horn stack broadcasting - there is no other word really - to about 100 people. While superficially impressive you wouldn't want that in your living room even if you lived in a barn.

Silbatone?

That was a cinema PA made in the 1920s.

Amazeballs playing Led Zeppelin Whole Lotta Love. Arguably not hi-fi in that you could hear distortion quite easily. Still, it did things many rooms could not. And generally had one of the highest attendances if the show.

The Silbatone room generally blows minds every year. But it is a bit of a cheat I think. There's a good measure of modern fettling of old gear going on.

[JohnG]

"Another big bonus is that CD reproduction has taken a leap forward, now instead of wishing the CD was a vinyl record, I can enjoy the medium without thinking it needs a big upgrade to compete.
Now that's a very pleasant surprise ".

I support you all the way with this statement, the recently acquired DAC left me 'Bedazzled' on the ground the CD gained on the Vinyl set up.

[Firebottle]

Excellent John

[pankon]

Great stuff, Alan!

I've also received an unexpected (i.e. greater than expected) sonic upgrade with the Khozmo attenuators in the Hattor passive preamp. If I can further build on that, and simplify the signal path by putting (new) Khozmo series attenuators (to replace the Tocos) AND a better input selector inside the Croft box, I will be more than happy.
In my case the cliche stands true... It's like a veil has been lifted. I am already getting far more layering between instruments and voices in space, everything is clearer and more transparent. Closer to reality than ever before.

We always believe we've reached the top performance of our gear, until we somehow manage to squeeze some extra performance. And then we think (again) we've reached the top, until there's more to squeeze.

Keep walkin'!

[Jimbo]

Yes, Olie, I understand Jimbo's position. It's perhaps what we all feel about our systems, until we try some kind of upgrade and -when it's successful- we ask ourselves why we had not tried that earlier.
My personal goal is to get the maximum out of a design / device with judicious tweaks. And I am happy to experience that Croft designs have A LOT of hidden potential. The pots and perhaps the input selector definitely have room for improvement, hence my choice of Khozmo attenuators. Perhaps there are other parts in the Croft amps that can be upgraded and achieve better, clearly discernible performance.
By the way, although logic said that I could do well with a well-built, dual mono passive preamp (a.k.a. Hattor) and get rid of the active preamp stage (a.k.a. Croft), my trial showed that the passive stage provide great neutrality and transparency, but the active stage brings "life" back to the music. Perhaps it injects distortion, which is perceived as "life", but after all "perception is reality", isn't it?
So, closing a full circle, the objective is to combine the best traits of the Hattor and the Croft, inside the Croft box. That's my short story so far.

Panos you have certainly worked out the pros and cons of an active rather than a passive preamp. I too have been down this path and come to the conclusion I prefer active for the same reasons as yourself. I do understand the merits of passive but so far have not found them to my suiting. I am surprised and interested in your evaluation of different volume pots but am not sure if other areas can give bigger gains i.e. better caps? This is certainly the route Glenn Croft has taken when adding foo items too preamps in the past. I suspect all manner of critical items in the path of the circuit and signal can benefit from upgrades. Maybe I will ask Glenn which he thinks give the biggest bang for bucks!

As Oliver had kindly mentioned I have a system that I rarely change anymore has it has the sound I am looking for and experimentation this year with various aspects has only taken away some of the sound quality. I must mention one item which has been my upgrade of the year and that was the SPOTFIRE cable, designed and built by Oliver. This is an extraordinary good cable which gave a huge performance upgrade in my system on many levels especially capacitance compatibility with my 2M Black cartridge which was an issue. I know some folk are sceptical of cables but the SPOTFIRE in my system was superb.

Future plans for my system include separating the PSU from the 25R and making it a 2 box line stage only preamp and then running an RIAA R phono stage through this. I may ask Glenn to add some foo to the line stage if he thinks there would be any benefits - maybe dual mono?

I look forward to reading your assessment of the new volume pots when you have got round to sorting them. Do you do the work yourself Panos?